FOR Western Australians in bushfire-prone regions, or who are members of the bushfire community, there was a sigh of relief when we finally learned the findings of the Ferguson Inquiry into the Yarloop bushfire, and examined Euan Ferguson's recommendations.
Those of us who have worked with Mr Ferguson had been confident.
We knew him to be intelligent, well-informed and experienced.
We knew that he would look beyond the circumstances of the fire to the root causes of the bushfire crisis in WA, and we felt sure that he would listen and learn during the review process.
We felt sure he would dismiss the inhumane views of those who are prepared to sacrifice lives and bushland to satisfy their ideology.
Our only reservation was the degree to which he would be constrained by politics and the inevitable opposition of those people and institutions who benefit from the status quo.
In the end we need not have worried. Ferguson delivered a Grade One report.
Yes, he has identified things that went wrong at the Yarloop fire, for example the traffic control points that prevented bushfire officers from doing their job and farmers from attending to stock, a warning system that did not warn, the collapse of the water supply at Yarloop just when it was most needed, and the failure to make best use of resources, especially volunteers.
These problems, he emphasised, were in the context of a complex, large and intense bushfire that was always going to be a tough assignment.
Of greater significance, Mr Ferguson looked deep into the bushfire management system in WA, and found many deficiencies.
Foremost is the failure by agencies, local government and land owners to reduce fuels in bushfire prone areas.
This is something we have been banging on about for many years.
Heavy fuels make for high-intensity fires with an associated ember storm, and it is these fires that kill people, burn down towns, incinerate whole landscapes and are so dangerous and difficult to control.
Mr Ferguson has nailed this, highlighting the extreme fuel loads that exist right across the South West and pointing out the inevitable consequences.
The principal villain in allowing this situation to develop was the former Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC), thankfully now replaced by the Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPaW) which has a more enlightened approach to fuel reduction.
The other culprit is the Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) which sees itself as "emergency responders", rather than bushfire managers who would prepare the fire grounds (by fuel reduction) before a fire occurs.
The emergency response approach is fine in the city, where firemen can rush to a burning house and pour water on it, but in the bush it only ever succeeds with small fires burning in light fuels under mild weather conditions.
The other important Ferguson recommendation is the creation of a Rural Fire Service.
This is strongly supported by country people.
They believe that their interests have never been looked after properly since the old Bush Fires Board was disbanded and replaced by FESA and then DFES.
Mr Ferguson, who was formerly the head of the Country Fire Service in South Australia and the Country Fire Authority in Victoria, clearly understands these issues.
A new agency, prepared to invest in bushfire mitigation and fuel reduction, working hand-in-glove with the volunteers, shires and DPaW, and ensuring that the Bush Fires Act is enforced, will bring a breath of fresh air into the rural fire scene.
However, three things worry me.
First, Mr Ferguson made an unfortunate concession to his recommendation about a Rural Fire Service, suggesting an alternative might be to create a country fire branch within DFES.
This smacks of political appeasement.
It would be a waste of time, because what is fundamentally needed is a change in policy, culture, outlook and personnel, and this will not occur if a new branch is still working under the old city-centric hierarchy at DFES.
The second worry is that the government has not come out and endorsed Mr Ferguson.
They have committed only to looking at it, over the next several months.
I believe Premier Colin Barnett recognises that things are not working and wants to make changes, but Emergency Services Minister Rob Francis appears lukewarm.
Perhaps he is under pressure from the fierce opposition to change within DFES and from the United Firefighter's Union (UFU).
This is a very powerful union, well-used to getting its own way, and they clearly see the Ferguson recommendations as a threat to their power and influence.
I can easily imagine the behind-the-scenes argy-bargy that will have already commenced.
The third worry is that the government might decide to defer any decision until after the election next year.
Mr Ferguson's recommendations could quite easily become history if Labor is elected and those opposing change find themselves in a stronger political position.
You only have to look at the shocking mess in Victoria at the moment, where the unions and the greens are calling the shots, to see what might happen here.
In the final analysis, the bushfire community has welcomed the Ferguson report, which we see as insightful and forward looking, but there is still a long way to go.
History is replete with bushfire reports that have been shelved, or where only the politically-easy bits were done.
Don't forget that the authorities have been aware for nearly 15 years that the fuel reduction program was way below target, but during that time the main response was to make it more difficult to get burns done.
Over the years I have said many times to ministers and departments - the time to fix the bushfire system is before we have a tragedy.
My line is a bit different after Yarloop - it is time to fix the system before we have another tragedy. Ferguson has given us the platform to do so.
p Roger Underwood is chairman of The Bushfire Front, volunteers dedicated to getting bushfire management in WA back on the rails.
DEAN Nalder is to be congratulated for his common sense remarks regarding the obvious dangers of the proposed Lands Act Amendment Bill and he should wear as a badge of honour the attacks upon him by the international pseudo Greenies such as the "PEW Foundation".
These very wealthy, very left wing organisations wield enormous power and they have enormous media clout.
They are accountable to no-one and pay no tax.
They have certainly never done anything constructive for the environment and use their huge wealth capriciously and in the most thuggish manner.
How Terry Redman can possibly think that parachuting a Green into the number one position on the senate ballot paper and ruthlessly pursuing his obviously Green-driven amendments to the Lands Act Administration Bill can possibly be compatible with the best interests of the farmers, miners and pastoralists that he is supposed to represent is mystery known only to God.
GRAEME CAMPBELL
Kalgoorlie
IT seems the educated elite have declared that the people voting for Brexit were the old, less educated, low paid pensioners.
This clearly inferred that those opinions were of little value and that another vote should be considered as political decisions should be left to the educated and the young.
This is typical of the sneering, snobbish attitude of academia.
Yes the elderly did vote to leave.
Perhaps they remember Britain as being a better place before linking itself to Europe.
At least they were in a position to make a comparison and ditto, the pensioners, but why were they singled out?
As for the Christians, despite the sins of some of the clergy, Christianity is still by far the greatest force for good in the world.
Surely no one would begrudge the low paid for aspiring to a change in their situation?
This leaves us with the less educated.
Why should their vote be regarded as in any way inferior?
Truth, integrity, brains, common sense and initiative are all as important as education.
I have been around for a long time and have learned to respect people from most sections of society.
An exception being the well educated people who use their education to belittle those who, for whatever reason, have not been so fortunate.
The ridiculing of Pauline Hanson when she freely admitted she did not know the meaning of Xenophobia, was a disgusting example of this despicable attitude.
So what of the highly educated?
It is reported that 132 British university vice chancellors voted 132-0 to remain.
I think the term for this is group think.
This is the latest advance in science and technology, which has dreamed up the global warming scare.
And let's not forget the Y2K bug, the hole in the ozone layer and the emperor's new clothes, the template for the scam penned by Hans Christian Anderson many years ago.
BRUCE HARVEY
Moorine Rock
